IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No.CC/151/2015.
Date of Filing: 30.10.2015. Date of Final Order: 29.03.2017.
Complainant: Ratna Pramanik, W/O Prabir Kumar Pramanik, 88, Exhibition Bagan Road,
P.O.&P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742101.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Khagra Branch, P.O. Khagra,
P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742103.
2. Regional Manager, State Bank of India, P.O. & P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad.
3. The Treasurer, The Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamilnadu-632004.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya …………………. President.
Sri Samaresh Kumar Mitra ……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya, Presiding Member.
This case has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for return of Rs.4200/- with interest and compensation of Rs.10, 000/- for mental stress and strain.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that she went to Christian Medical College, Vellore where she had swiped her ATM card of State Bank of India at CMC cash counter on 2.10.2014 for Rs.4200/-. The swipe machine showed ‘transaction failure” and a slip showing ‘transaction failure” message came out of the machine. After some time the complainant received a text message on her Mobile stating “Rs.4200/” has been debited from the account. Immediately, after that the complainant called to the SBI help line and made complaint. On the next day she went o CMC account section and SBI, Vellore and informed this matter but received no solution. Coming from Vellore, she made complaint in writing at SBI, Khagra Branch, Berhampore. On 14.10.2014 she got message on her Mobile which states “Rs.4200/ has been credited to your account” but when she updated her pass book of savings account she knew that Rs.4200/- was debited from her account 17.10.2014 on the same TXN No. 0003664240195. She made several complaints before the S.B.I, Khagra Branch but her all efforts were not fruitful. Finding no other alternative, the complainant came before this Forum for relief. Hence, the present complaint.
The case of the OP Nos. 1&2 , in brief, is that on the basis of complaint of the complainant the bank credited a sum of Rs.4200/- into the account of the complainant on 14.10.2014 . Thereafter, the Bank made enquiry through online computerized system and came to know from ATM Switch centre that a sum of Rs.4200/- had been paid into the account of the OP No.3 on 02.10.2014from the account of the complainant. So, for the purpose of reconciliation bank debited the said amount from the account of the complainant on 17.10.2014 . The complainant paid Rs.4200/- twice to CMC. So, the CMC Vellore, OP No.3 should have checked their account before claiming cash from the complainant. There is no negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the OP Nos. 1&2 and the complaint is liable to be rejected against OP Nos. 1&2.
The case of the OP No.3, in brief, is that complainant Ratna Pramanick had been a patient of CMC and took treatment from 02.09.2014 to 26.10.2015. The complaint filed by the complainant is about the “wrong debit” made by the swipe machine located at Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore which is owned and maintained by the State Bank of India. As there is no medical negligence and no claim against OP No.3, the name of the OP No.3 may be expunged.
Upon pleadings of both parties the following points have been raised for the disposal of the case.
Points for Consideration.
Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and law?
- Whether the complainant has any locus standi to file the present case.
- Whether the complaint is barred by the Law of Limitation
- Whether the present complaint is bad for defect of parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the complainant is entitled to get?
Decision with Reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 6.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
The complainant’s case is for payment of rs.4200/- along with interest for wrong debit at the time of transaction failure at the c ash counter of CMC, Vellore on 02.10.2014 .
On the other hand the OP-Banks’ case is that the transaction was successful.
To prove the case the complainant has adduce d evidence –on-affidavit along with materials on record showing transaction failure of Rs.42,000/- after cash counter of OP No.3 and cash receipt of Rs.4025/- dt. 02.10.14 in favour of the complainant issued by OP No.3 and bank statement of the complainant in respect of her bank account of OP no.1-Bank showing debit entry on 02.10.14 and 17.10.14 of Rs.4200/- each and credit entry on 14.10.14 of Rs.42,000/-
On the other hand the OP Nos. 1&2 Bank has filed the documents showing POS transaction from the A/C of the complainant with OP No.3-CMC, Vellore Association for Rs.4200/- successful.
This Forum then called for the documents from OP No.3 in this regard but no responded inspite of receiving the copy of the concerned order.
Be that as it may, in this case the OP No.3 has filed written version along with all the relevant documents relating to transactions for the treatment of the complainant at their centre claiming as mis-joinder of party on the ground that the complaint filed by the complainant. The complaint filed by the complainant is about the ‘wrong debit’ made by the swipe machine located at Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore which is owned and maintained by the State Bank of India.
Relating to the impugned transaction the complainant has filed the document showing transaction failure.
It is true that this is case is for wrong debit in the savings A/C of the complainant by the OP-Bank and not by the OP No.3-Medical Centre.
Further, OP No.3’s case as per written version is clear that the instant case is not for medical service.
It is clear that this not a case for medical negligence.
It is further crystal clear that the complainant is not a consumer of OP No.3 and no relief has been sought for by the complainant against OP No.3 and as such we can safely conclude that the complainant has no relief against OP No.3.
Admittedly, the complainant is a consumer of OP No.1&2 Bank and the complainant has clearly discharged her primary onus by adducing the document showing transaction failure and now, the onus has been shifted to the OP Nos. 1&2. To prove by cogent evidence the document submitted by them showing transaction successful in favour of OP No.3 but that document is not sufficient.
In this regard the savings bank A/C of OpNo.3 is to be called for. The onus is upon the OP Nos. 1&2 and not upon Op No.3.
If there is any claim the OP No.1&2 is to realize from OP No.3.
The complainant being customer of OP No.1 bank having her savings bank A/c where the impugned transaction was failed but debited inspite of giving credit to that effect.
Considering the above discussions as a whole we can safely conclude that the complainant is entitled to get back Rs.4200/- along with interest @7% pa. from 02.10.14 till the date of realization from OP Nos. 1&2 .
On the basis of above discussions as a whole we find that all the points are disposed of in favour of the complainant in part and as such the complainant is entitled to get Rs.4200/- along with interest @7% p.a. from 02.10.14 till the date of realization from OP Nos. 1&2.
Hence,
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 151/2015 be and the same is allowed in part against the Op Nos. 1&2 and dismissed against OP No.3 ex parte..
The complainant is entitled to get Rs.4200/- along with interest @7% p.a. from 02.10.14 till the date of realization.
The OP Nos. 1&2 jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.4200/- along with interest @7% p.a. from 02.10.14 till realization to the complainant.
The OP No.1 is directed to pay Rs.4200/- along with interest @7% p.a. from 02.10.14 till realization within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the OPs are to pay Rs.50/- as fine per day’s delay and the amount so accumulated shall be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
